Well, a lot has happened in the physics world–faster than light neutrinos, no Higgs yet, and an amazing story about t’Hooft (The Infinity Puzzle).

What about my stuff? Well, I take time to think, I take time to run physics simulations, I take time to do various kinds of analysis, and I take time to post here. I haven’t posted for a month or two because I am deep in the twist solution analysis. I’ll try to post updates, but there are some pretty critical questions about this twist theory.

To refresh, I claim that E=hv quantization implies a twist structure. Integral quantization for all particles in a continuous system implies that the particles are best modeled by a twist in a background state vector field.

That doesn’t mean that the twist is actually physical (reality) but it does mean there has to be a mapping. When I study the options that come closest to the reality we observe by experiment, I have concluded that it is most likely that the twist is real in some way, in an underlying variant of a Maxwell field that is unitary. As I’ve explained in the past here, such a system has to have a maximum speed for particles, and gives a geometrical basis for the laws of special relativity. It shows how both photons and electrons could work, with correct values for mass resulting from the ratio of the electrostatic force to the magnetic force (twist rings), and the work I’ve been doing lately shows how inertial mass could spring from mass particles but not affect photons. Pretty good snake oil, ain’t it!

But I see a problem.

The assumptions I’ve made above seem to be good, but I’ve attempted to do careful and very specific analysis of what the twist looks like mathematically. As explained in previous posts, the twist for photons must be planar to the direction of travel and can only be stable if moving at speed c. The twist for electrons is encompassed in a ring like the old DeBroglie electron, but is a twist, not an oscillation. When pushed by an external force, the ring distorts, and the resisting force of this distortion, which will be proportionate to the momentum of the twist, will give the inertial behavior of the particle. Looks really good from all points of view.

Here’s the problem. I believe I’ve proved that my current mathemetical 3D+T model of the twist, contrary to what I said in previous posts, has a discontinuity. Although the twist is topologically stable, it cannot exist without a discontinuity in the field–even when confined to moving only at speed c. This is a showstopper–if a continuous solution could be found, I would be on my way to computing the gravititational constant from the ratio of the electrostatic and magnetic forces. But a discontinuous system means that infinities have to be introduced into the twist mathematical description. Not impossible, but not elegant–suggesting that the model is too complex and that I’ve got it wrong here.

I’m not done–I am still searching for a way out. I thought I figured this all out, but when I tried to pin down that solution from about a year ago, I found that it doesn’t work. Now I’m looking at other possibilities again.

Agemoz

## Leave a Reply